Dear Doc:
Being as that I have great respect for your ideas and journalistic opinions, I thought I would bring my latest question to you.
My television station is “teaming up” with the State Patrol to promote seatbelt use. We are “required” to run seatbelt stories and conduct interviews every day for a week on the subject. While I am completely behind the idea of using seatbelts, I have a problem with the fact that we’re teaming up with a state agency.
I have lofty ideas that as journalists we should remain as impartial as possible and not “bow down” to state institutions. I know if it was the station alone doing this series, I wouldn’t be bothered by it.
So what’s your take on this? Am I being overly sensitive or are the standards I set for my superiors too high?
P.S. Being as that I’m a peon in this place and several people read things from your website, I’d appreciate it if you would sign me as anonymous.
Answer:
What would the station do if it discovered, as part of its coverage, that the State Patrol was using this initiative in questionable ways. What if they had a ticket quota? What if they were being abusive to drivers? What if they used the crusade to pick up women? Would the station retain enough independence to report on flaws in the program? Would it be forced to back out of the deal?
Dr. Ink shares this reporter’s concern. She may consider herself a peon, but she is raising exactly the right questions about news judgment, independence, and the avoidance of conflict of interest.
Journalists have learned the hard way that there are no safe crusades. There are no causes and programs so pure that they cannot be corrupted. That’s why we need journalists as watchdogs, not lapdogs.
